WASHINGTON -- Reviewing inaugural speeches is a tricky business.
Immediate impressions can be spot on. Of President John Kennedy's address,
John Steinbeck commented, "Syntax, my lad. It has been restored to the
highest place in the republic." Other judgments have been, well, hasty. The
New York Herald called President Lincoln's second inaugural "a little
speech of 'glittering generalities' used only to fill in the program."

Given President Barack Obama's background, his inaugural address would
have been a memorable event even if every word had been a Flag Day
platitude. Unfortunately, too many of his words were platitudes.

To be sure, Obama has a presence and confidence that completely filled
America's main rhetorical stage -- extraordinary for a man who just six
years ago was giving floor speeches in the Illinois Legislature. His
arguments were sophisticated and politically ambitious. But the speech
itself was -- amazingly, inexplicably -- uneven in its quality.

There were high points. "Our security," Obama said, "emanates from the
justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of
humility and restraint." That sentence has a spare elevation -- a natural
rhythm when read aloud. The speech contained hints of John Kennedy in its
assertion that "the nation cannot prosper long when it favors only the
prosperous." And Obama made effective but unobtrusive use of religious
references, speaking of "still waters" and setting aside "childish things."

But the first literary goal of an inaugural address is to express
familiar American ideals without resorting to distracting cliches. And
Obama generally failed this test. There were too many "rising tides" and
"gathering clouds" and "raging storms" and "nagging fears" and "dark
chapters" and "watchful eyes" and "dying campfires" and "icy currents."
Wages had to be "decent," and markets "spin out of control." It is simply
mysterious how such tired language could sound appropriate to the ear of
Obama the writer. Some phrases were just strange. Recriminations have
"strangled" our politics, as in some "CSI" episode. We have "tasted the
bitter swill of civil war and segregation." Yuck, in so many ways.

In content, Obama's speech was more compelling. His vivid assurances
of toughness on national security were genuinely reassuring. When is the
last time we heard a national Democrat admit that "our nation is at war"
and promise to "defeat" American enemies? His discussion of the role of
government was more sophisticated than in any inaugural since Ronald
Reagan's in 1981 -- though his post-partisan appeal more resembled Bill
Clinton's Third Way than Reagan's firm assertion of limited government.

And Obama's main argument -- for a "new era of responsibility" -- was
traditional without being tired. From the beginning, Americans have
displayed a unique combination of revolutionary idealism and moral
conservatism. American presidents have generally asserted that the
achievement of radical or progressive ideals such as unity and social
justice requires a return to timeless American values such as
responsibility and self-restraint, charity and the end of malice. Woodrow
Wilson, for example, argued, "there has been something crude and heartless
and unfeeling in our haste to succeed and be great. Our thought has been,
'Let every man look out for himself. ... '" But the answer, he continued,
would be found in restoring "the standards we so proudly set up at the
beginning and have always carried at our hearts."

Similarly, Obama's address diagnosed a time of "standing pat, of
protecting narrow interests." And he rooted his vision of social and
economic restoration in the renewal of moral virtues -- courage, honesty,
fair play, loyalty, tolerance, patriotism and duty. He insisted on using
the word "virtue" and explained that such convictions are not merely useful
but "true."

This shows a deep understanding of America, which remains moral to its
core -- and a mature understanding of American leadership. Obama's argument
should appeal to many conservatives, who would never accept a case for
progressive policies based on relativistic or libertarian moral views. Like
Lincoln or Martin Luther King, Obama positioned himself as a conservative
revolutionary -- attempting to re-create our country by reasserting the
traditional moral principles that gave it birth.

This type of insight makes President Obama a formidable political
figure -- and if he really believes and defends these ideals, perhaps a
formidable American leader.

Heading into this inaugural address, many expected the speech to be
rhetorically masterful, but perhaps ideologically shallow. Instead, we
heard a speech that was rhetorically flat and substantively interesting. On
his first day in office, President Obama has managed to surprise.